Van Pelt v. Russell
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeals from White Circuit Court; J. M. Jackson, Judge; 1. Russell as receiver had no authority to maintain the attachment suit.
Read the full summary
Appeals from White Circuit Court; J. M. Jackson, Judge; 1. Russell as receiver had no authority to maintain the attachment suit. Kirby’s Digest, § § 6342, 6355-6; 71 Ark. 17-24. 2. He was entitled to his repairs. 36 Ark. 17-35. 3. A mortgagor is entitled to the use of the land until dispossessed. 36 Ark. 29. 4. The relation of landlord and tenant must exist. 57 Ark. 215; 61 Id. 515, 519; 93 Id. 215; 221; 68 Id. 584; 97 Id. 262; 119 Id. 543, 549. 5. The law forbids the splitting of accounts. 1 R. C. L. 358, 341, § 22; 125 Ark. 400. 6. A verdict should have been directed, as no verified…
1Opinion of the Court
HART, J.,
(after stating the facts). In the attachment case the record shows that an application was made for the appointment of a receiver to take charge of the land involved in the foreclosure suit; that H. D. Bussell was appointed as such receiver for the purpose of renting the land and collecting the rents therefrom. These facts are shown by the order appointing him as receiver. The record also shows that he entered upon the discharge of his duties as such receiver and demanded that Van Pelt should pay him the rent for the land for the year 1916: that Van Pelt was in possession of the land…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Love v. CahnSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Perry County Bank v. RankinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Brickey v. CotterSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
3Cited by5 opinions
- Deming Investment Co. v. Bank of JudsoniaSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1926
- Moore v. PriceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
- Ford Hardwood Lumber Co. v. BryantSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1929
- Kelly v. WeirDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1965
- Rehberger v. WegenerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1930